I have a link to the source of this photo, but I’m hesitant to put it up, because of the people who have her.. I’d rather not have any contact with them. This girl is one of the most beautiful dingoes I’ve ever seen, she’s wild born, and a rescue. She’s the type the majority of people would call a dingo cross, or a wild dog. Thankfully she is in a safe-ish place, with a rescue who prioritize DNA testing because they breed and sell dingo pups to people as ‘pets’. I do not support this. On so many levels. The point is, this dingoes result was 100% genetic ‘purity’. I’m uncomfortable with genetic purity when it comes to what is and isn’t a dingo, for a number of reasons. There are genetically ‘pure’ dingo with known (and human caused) hybrid ancestry who have been bred in captivity for generations. These dingoes are bred to live with people and other dingoes (and dogs), and wouldn’t last a week in the wild. They are bred with the appeal to save the species, used to conduct behavioural research and are theoretically going to be re-wilded in the future when wild dingoes are obsolete. You can have a litter of hybrid pups, with a wide range of dingo DNA percentages, that may be crossed with dingoes to result in “pure” dingoes within a few generations, which is a bit of an indicator of the redundancy of testing. I’m personally more inclined to use the low/ mid/ high content terms for known hybrids, as used with US wolfdogs, though there aren’t often cases when this is even necessary. If an animal fits the phenotype and morphology, if it eats, breeds, behaves, and has the combination of dingo traits (despite characteristic variation), it’s a dingo. This is what causes so much confusion and problems in a number of areas of dingo management, conservation and research. What does a dingo look like? You can get so many answers from so many people, and often the context will reflect what they are familiar with geographically, and the era that they were educated. The science of “What is a Dingo?” has changed dramatically over the past 5 years, let alone a decade ago. Regardless of this, it doesn’t mean everyone has been motivated to move on with the times, and data and definition is often out of date. You need to actively be looking through current research to be aware of those changes. I have spoken with a number of farmers and shooters who have shown me animals they have killed, when I ask what they believe is a Wild Dog vs a Dingo. Some will say they are one and the same, but many say it wasn’t a dingo - it was a wild dog, a domestic dog living feral. A kelpie cross, a shepherd cross, greyhound cross - all based on a very superficial characteristic of coat colour. The animal in the photo has almost always been a dingo, and they are surprised when I tell them so, and show them evidence of the diversity of what dingoes can look like, based on preserved specimens from the 19th Century - before dogs had a chance to interbreed with them. Many of them believe dingoes to be extinct on the mainland, saying all dingoes are bred out by dogs. This is where the misinformation in this country leads to, unlike wolf and wolfdog problems in America. This misinformation is initiated by the ambiguity and categorisation of dingoes/ hybrids/ dogs to serve the agendas of interest groups, not individual ego. Dingoes are one of the most controversial animals here, whether it is from the standpoint of agricultural interest, conservation, captive management, ecological integrity and purely cultural interests.
Well, this dingo is a dingo, by the test tube - for those who trust in that. She was born in the wild, on the mainland, and she isn’t ginger, black or white. She contradicts much of the council and government definition of what a dingo looks like, she even contradicts what pro-dingo breeders and activists will say they look like. But here she is, and I think she is a good example of why there needs to be more awareness of what a dingo can be.